Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date: 2010-08-11 14:01:43
Message-ID: 4C62AD47.9070305@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 08/11/2010 09:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 08/11/2010 12:42 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> ... However, it does seem like we ought to be able to
>>> do something about two buildfarm critters defaulting to the same choice
>>> of port number.
>> Why not just add the configured port (DEF_PGPORT) into the calculation
>> of the port to run on?
> No, that would be just about the worst possible choice. It'd be
> guaranteed to fail in the standard scenario that you are running
> "make check" before updating an existing installation.

One of us is missing something. I didn't say to run the checks using the
configured port. I had in mind something like:

port = 0xC000 | ((PG_VERSION_NUM + DEF_PGPORT) & 0x3FFF);

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2010-08-11 14:06:35 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-11 13:55:07 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment